|
Member
(08-12-2012, 12:32 AM)
|
#53
Private health inspectors.
If the inspector doesn't do a good job, then their reputation suffers and both restaurant goers and restaurants will be dissuaded from hiring them/trusting them. A really good inspector would probably offer some sort of insurance benefit to the consumer that if they got sick the inspector would pay damages. People determine what level of health-safety they require, and competitive market means more inspectors who constantly look for the important things that actually affect food safety, not report writing. I think that's a suitable alternative to government permits for opening food stands. http://www.ul.com/global/eng/pages/o...od/foodsafety/
Last edited by Kad5; 08-12-2012 at 12:36 AM.
|
|
Member
(08-12-2012, 12:36 AM)
|
#55
I know when I want food prepared street-side from a cart, I want that cart operated by a 13-year-old!
|
|
card-carrying scientician
(08-12-2012, 12:36 AM)
|
#56
Also what makes you think this kid could have afforded a reputable inspector to clear his operation if he couldn't afford a permit? |
|
Member
(08-12-2012, 12:37 AM)
|
#57
It's not like there aren't already standards that people are familiar with though.
|
|
(08-12-2012, 12:39 AM)
|
#59
Quote:
|
|
card-carrying scientician
(08-12-2012, 12:40 AM)
|
#60
I don't understand how that relates to my point. The inspector and the restaurant still have to develop a bad reputation from letting people get ill for these free-marker mechanisms to work. Its reactive, not proactive.
|
|
Member
(08-12-2012, 12:41 AM)
|
#61
Sure but does this not happen anyway? In the current system the inspector probably gets paid around the same amount regardless of the job he is doing in terms of quality yes?
|
|
card-carrying scientician
(08-12-2012, 12:45 AM)
|
#63
Well no, I doubt that bad health inspectors never get fired. The government does fire people for bad performance. But in your proposed free-market system people as a whole have to recognize that an inspector isn't very good. You put a lot more faith in reputation and its ability to infiltrate the zeitgeist than I do.
|
|
(08-12-2012, 12:53 AM)
|
#67
How's that different than a guy leasing the space next to you for $1000 dollars? I could see the rather crowded sidewalk in front of my restaurant being an issue with three carts crowding the entrance but to ban all carts completely seem a bit anti business.
|
|
Member
(08-12-2012, 12:57 AM)
|
#68
|
|
Member
(08-12-2012, 01:15 AM)
|
#69
The internet has plenty of sites that do ratings for the quality of restaurants. I'm confident this isn't one of those things in this day and age that the government HAS to inherently get involved with. Yelp.com is an example.
Last edited by Kad5; 08-12-2012 at 01:18 AM.
|
|
Call 911!
(08-12-2012, 01:26 AM)
|
#70
I've got no problem with food carts, but I don't have a problem with zoning laws either. |
|
(08-12-2012, 01:42 AM)
|
#72
Either way I agree with the last point so lets just all be friends. |
|
I am Korean.
(08-12-2012, 01:47 AM)
|
#74
Assuming they aren't punishing zeitgeist via astroturfing.
|
|
#upliftingtherace
(08-12-2012, 08:38 AM)
|
#75
people can collude to ruin the reputations of some private inspectors and restaurants and boost others.
a disgruntled employee can destroy the business (and inspector rep) by contaminating something! |
|
clairvoyancy is no excuse for trollin'
(08-12-2012, 08:54 AM)
|
#78
Quote:
|
|
He's not our sharpest knife. In fact, he's one of our dullest.
(08-12-2012, 08:57 AM)
|
#80
This is what I was wondering as well. One can find small apartments for under $500 and they would surely qualify for housing assistance which should cut their rent dramatically.
|
|
Member
(08-12-2012, 08:58 AM)
|
#81
Just because something is the law does not mean the law is just and should be enforced. There are many stupid laws on the books that would ruin this country if they were ever enforced.
The people that say this is justice should be forced to live homeless like this poor kid. |
|
Member
(08-12-2012, 09:00 AM)
|
#83
Again, I don't know the Holland area, but unless you've made some amazingly bad mistakes with credit cards and stuff, you can live off $600 a month here and not be homeless. Not WELL (you'll just have the bare necessities and your apartment will be small), but you can do it. This is Michigan, even druggies can get an apartment here if they have any amount of savvyness. People on straight disability usually aren't druggies however, as the requirements are much stricter than SSI. |
|
Member
(08-12-2012, 09:04 AM)
|
#86
That I can definitely agree with. There is absolutely no reason to be homeless living on $1300 in Michigan. As long as you stick to the necessaries (Food, Services, Internet), you could even live pretty well. I'd kill to get $1300 on my SSI. :\
|
|
He's not our sharpest knife. In fact, he's one of our dullest.
(08-12-2012, 09:07 AM)
|
#87
|
|
Member
(08-12-2012, 10:23 AM)
|
#90
If something makes you sick you would have to prove which company is at fault, fight against a large team of lawyers. Because of tort reforms you will not get enough money to cover your health expenses anyway and the financial loss to the company won't be enough for it to be profitable to change their policies. Would you get rid of fire codes as well? Then you could start a night club, not follow any of the old regulation and then declare bankrupcy when something happens and start a new club the next week. Or would the guests be at fault for not investigating the fire exits and sorinkler systems themselves?
Last edited by kottila; 08-12-2012 at 10:29 AM.
|
|
oh oh oh Roberto Luongo
(08-12-2012, 10:28 AM)
|
#91
Quote:
|
|
Member
(08-12-2012, 10:54 AM)
|
#95
Your tone sounds a bit mocking, but if you have no other option, it's not a bad lifestyle. Beats being homeless, and you always have company and a chance to move up.
|
|
Member
(08-12-2012, 12:08 PM)
|
#97
It's very bizarre that you think a world where someone has to do research on the internet just to assure themselves that they won't get salmonella from the burger joint down the street is somehow ideal.
|
|
Member
(08-12-2012, 01:25 PM)
|
#98
Couldn't every restaurant also make the customers sign away their right to sue them?
|
|
Member
(08-12-2012, 02:40 PM)
|
#99
It doesn't negate it, but if you're one of those people that everyone should always be punished to the maximum extent of the law, or should always be punished at all really, you're honestly not a very good person.
|